Jornal de Sparxx43, 02 nov 15

ARe you sure that is accurate? I am pretty positive that 54 hours walking burn more than 7321 calories!  

Doesn't sound right does it? I think I'll clear the totals and start again, calculating it myself. 

Not sure about steps. Looks like you're burning around 130-135 calories per hour. What is your heart rate during your walks? Are you getting into your target heart rate zone? I have read for good results it's best to keep HR over 65%. I try everything to keep my HR "in zone." I pump the arms, use light ankle weights and tackle hills. I did that today and burned 90 calories in 15 minutes. My HR was 67%. I have no idea on steps, though. Either way, be kind to yourself. At least you are moving.  

Heart rate? Goodness, no idea whatsoever. It's just the pedometer on my IPod. It can't read my heart rate. I guess it was just about getting moving. I've got a pretty half-hearted attitude to exercise. Love the idea that I could lose weight without it. It's possible, but would take a lot longer to achieve apparently. I'm trying to motivate myself to sort myself out. Concentrating on my lousy diet at the moment. Or rather my lousy snacking choices.  

Pedometers usually have a setup where you have to calibrate it to your steps - perhaps this will fix the problem? 

As this is just an added function to the IPod...probably not. Or I can't see how. I think there's something else wrong with it anyway. Says I've done 37 workouts, but looking at each one individually there's only 21. Maybe I should just get a decent pedometer... 

I use a Misfit shine (looks like a watch) - you can get quite a selection of different wrist type ones now in the likes of PC World.  

I would choose an economical heart monitor over another pedometer, TBH. I use a Polar FT4 heart monitor for all exercise. It tells me duration of exercise, what my calorie burn is, average heart rate, max heart rate and how long I was in my target zone. As a result, I know when to push myself more or slow things down. It was about £40 but I've seen used ones on eBay. For me, it was worth the investment. When I was really on the case and tracking everything, I was getting the results. There are other heart monitors where it logs everything for you in some computer programme. As for me, I put everything in a spreadsheet. Some might think that's a bit much but I like doing it. I'm a sucker for data and I like to see how/if I'm making progress, i.e. burning more calories, etc. I find FS is a great tool but hard for me to see long-term how I'm doing exercise wise. I can't say I love exercising. I just love 

you an pick up reasonable HRM for a reasonable price. I just use one from sports direct, it covers steps, calories burnt and gives distance. You also have a workout zone that will also tell you all of the above but just for that workout, it also ads it to your total. It resets at midnight but it will show you in a bar chart your busiest time of the day and also your overall target zone. Sorry I forgot to mention its a watch. Don't forget they all have an error rate and a lot work by guesstimation. but its £49.00. I just use it as a motivator. 

I also use my ipod, an old nano 6th gen. Have you calibrated it for your weight? Also you will burn less calories if you are walking slowly, eg counting steps shopping, walking round the house, than when walking briskly for exercise.  

Eclipsesolaire - Yes I thought of the weight. I've only been using it this time for a month but hadn't changed the weight since last time I used it a year ago. The weight was correct. I've been hanging around the same weight for a year. Talk about needing a boot up the backside. Thanks for all the suggestions. I'll have a browse and find one that I think will suit me. 

if youn want to use cardio to lose weight then the target range is approx. 60 to 70% of Maximum Heart Rate. This way you will use fat as the energy provider. Any higher than that and you tap into other energy sources. Also by working at a slower rate you will be able to work out for longer. Or so the theory goes, however another school of thought is that a calorie burnt is a calorie burnt no matter what you use hence using smaller cardio sessions. Different strokes for different folks. Don't forget as well that by doing other strength exercises is that you will be increasing muscle mass which will weigh heavier than fat. I personally work at a higher rate somewhere between 80-90% of MHR but I train for a different reason. I don't know is you know the formula to work out heart rate, its: for a women: 226 - Age. This gives you a MHR Divide MHR by 100 and times by whatever % you are working at. For example a women age 40: 226-40 = 186. 186 divided by 100 = 1.86 times 65 (training %) = training heart rate of 120 hope that makes sense.